music Madredeus (Portugal)

What's funny is that while Dave Gouras is accusing other people of being David Geiszler he is making statements that are pretty much direct quotes of David Geiszler. "look at the absentees" and saying he is friends with some of the top photographers on here. Are you harrassing and stalking the female photographers on this site as well?

 

Well here's a little bit of info I shared with David Geiszler that is appropriate here. Most of the Top Photographers according to the list do not contribute much if anything to the site other than their pictures. This site's reputation wasn't built because of one or two good photographs posting their images on the site but because of the thousands of others that take the time to provide information and discuss topics of interest to other photographers. I'm not sure who you are talking about specifically but I know a good number of the people towards the top of the list haven't taken the time to give input on other's work except maybe pow. Most have only been members since the ratings system has been put into effect. They don't respond to questions on their photos either directly through email or in response to comments left on their photos. You can delete the whole gallery and there will be no tangible loss to the learning potential of the site, the reason that most people come here and why this site has been recognized as a leader in photographic information on the internet. There are some exceptions but not many. Up until there were indications that donating to the site would get you a better spot in the ratings rotation most people weren't monetary contributors. How accurate that statement is though I'm not sure because the same person that made that claim made other false claims about how the ratings system worked.

 

If anything the Top Member rated page has only caused problems on the site and like others I would like to see it seriously reworked or removed completely. Taxing the limited resources of staff and hardware while providing minimal gain. If those few photographers are so outraged over POW then let them leave. I'm sure few people will even notice and I know that the quality of the site will not degrade one bit. If you or they think they are that important to this site you are wrong. Dead wrong. A few handful of photographers in a community of this many won't make a difference no matter how good they are with the camera (or in most cases how good they are playing the ratings game.) There have been second hand reports that some of the top rated photographers are going to leave for a long time now but not one of them has said so directly and none have left or if they have nobody really noticed.

 

If their absence would be so traumatic and so obvious why does someone have to announce it? Obviously nobody noticed until you said something. But don't tell them that... the news might shatter their pedastals.

 

As to the technical deficiencies of this photo I still think they are minor compared to the whole. The photographer part of me wants to see fine detail and sharpness but I know there's more to that. I've almost thrown away a few images because of a lack of sharpness that wound up being huge favorites of others. As I was getting them framed I was almost appologetic for bringing something like that to get framed so nicely. My framer is also a photographer and someone who's artistic opinion I respect. He said "It's fine art, it doesn't have to be sharp" and went on to explain how some of his friends do things like kick the tripod at the last moment of exposure to introduce some sort of blemish.

 

Before this image was selected as POW all the comments were positive and while the ratings were lower they were good by the rating norms of the time. I'm happy that this is POW. I remember when I first saw this image it really captured my attention and it still does.

 

 

 

serbus, alen. seveda, najprej cestitke! me veseli, da ti je uspelo. fajn pa je tut, da sem koncno videl malo vec tvojih fotk. vecina se mi zdi odlicna, tak da, ce se spet tak dolgo ne boma vidla, bom lahko vsaj fotke gledal, a ne? fajn bi pa blo, ce bi mi poslal mejl, ko bos dodajal nove. fajn delaj se naprej, ce bo pa medtem kaj cajta, pa lahko gremo na kak pir. a vela?

Excellent

picture !

Well, not wanting to be classified in the crowd of people who "never leave a comment," (check my profile if you think thats so,) I've decided to leave my two cents worth."I'm here to talk photography and learn something if I can."

Tell me, then, what you have learned about this weeks POW? Or about last weeks POW? Or about the e-mails in your Inbox I'm sure you've gotten from a few of our sharp-tounged peers.

Can anybody honestly say, aside from Alen Borovicanin himself, that they've learned something pertinent to photography while reading or posting on this thread?

You people [largely being the general population of Tris bashers] accuse each other of not staying on topic, yet you yourself rarely leave your own comment on the photograph. At least Tris, though sometimes snide and ignorant, has left his own opinion about the photographs and asked questions of the photographer. I, myself, have scrolled down the scores of comments only to find that a miniscule ammount of detail has actually been revealed about the photo or photographer himself. Let's not be hypocrits here, please.((You'll have to excuse me, I felt like poking at both sides of the argument))

I've shot quite a bit of theatre, dance and music on stage. Shooting stage work can be challenging but lots of fun. Due the low light, I'm shooting at a 15th, 30 or 60 at 2.8, 4 or 5.6...depending on the stage lighting. I am a lover of grainy images for certain types of work and this image has a terrific grainy, smoky, mood provoking quality to it. I especially love the stage lighting in this shot. Clearly the singer is moving as noticed by another poster. I only know that because I wear long earrings and see that one is forward and the other is tilted to the back of her neck just a tad. I also note the lack of detail in the dress but it does not bother me. I took the image into a program on my computer and see that in fact the faces of the musicians are not at all as sharp as the woman in the front. I'm waiting to hear from the photograher to learn more details and refrain from taking any of the quesses seriously. We don't "know" much more than what the artist has told us and making assumptions is quite foolish. I'm on photo net to be inspired and to have fun with my passion which is photography. Instead, of late, I'm reading words that seem to demonstrate how much knowledge someone has -- generously peppered repetitively with how stupid so many of us are...especially if we simply like an image and say - Great shot - with what I feel is a genuine exclamation of appreciation....! Why discourage people from expressing themselves and why make them feel intimidated and perhaps leave no comment at all. Isn't it possible that plenty of photonetters are not as technically knowledgeable and will learn from others that do leave constructive critiques Better that they say something. I know I appreciate it when someone leaves a sentiment of appreciation for my work! Others leave helpful points or questions all of which I value. For this POW I have learned something and for that I thank Sam Dilworth, Jeff Spirer, Tom Menegatos, Darron Spohn and Richard Sintchak for very informative and balanced critiques that even I can understand. I will be the first to admit that I don't know as much as some on this site. Sometimes I can say nothing more than "Beautiful shot"... I guess that is one reason I'm here. I'm self taught and a visual - attention deficit learner -- which means an over abundance of overly technical details makes my brain go flat-lined. Does this mean I can't 1) take good pictures 2) make lots of money in a field I have a keen passion for? 3) Through trial and error and by looking at as much good work as I can - learn for the rest of my life and improve every step of the way? 4) Be inspired by some of the wonderful and helpful "mentors" on this site? No one says that an honest and intellegent critique isn't appreciated here. It is the "other stuff" -- the pithy insulting and condescending stuff that I could do without.

 

And just how does one best go about the process of learning?

 

Tris, you obviously didn't take my suggestion in the spirit it was meant, in which case there is little point me expanding upon it.

 

Thanks for your feedback.

 

What I wrote wasn't feedback. I have a feeling this reply was just sarcasm, which probably isn't really the best way to go about learning and sharing.

 

I agree that comments such as "wow" and "great" do not provide the kind of constructive criticism that is useful. However, if that is how viewers feel about an image, at least they are able to register their delight. They are surely entitled to their opinion too. Among the brickbats, the photographer can at least take solace in a few modest bouquets.

This is not a comment on the photo, but a comment on the self important people who post on photo.net

>When the site's most [self-] important contributors are absent from discussion....then....start to worry.

That is when I'll rejoice.

Don't let the door hit you in the arse, self-important ones.

Could you please add the ability to filter out certain posters from the POW comments? I've developed a list of members who babble incessantly about things having nothing to do with the photograph, and I'd like to read the comments uncluttered by their 'contributions'.

 

Thank you.

 

P.S. If this is not possible, could you place the member's name at the beginning of the text block so I know how to treat what follows?

 

P.P.S. I wish I understood B&W better. There are some atmospheric/moody aspects to this shot I quite like, that would be difficuly to duplicate in color, but I also miss the color contrasts that are typically present in staged lighting. I'd like to have seen a color rendition of the same scene, side by side, to see the differences. It's is an unfortunate habit of mine to look at a B&W shot and wonder what it originally looked like.

It's sad when a few posters consistently get more attention to their comments, than the featured photographer receives for his photo. I think if more of these people got off their a$$es and shot more pictures, instead of endlessly going tit-for-tat with others in this forum, the quality of the images at photo.net would go up significantly.... As for the photo, I like it in general, however the soft focus, grain, and heavy contrast detract for me. The only compositional nit I have is the elbows of the singer and guitarist are superimposed. As for the elves- I seriously doubt they lose sleep over the criticism they get for their selections for POW. If you don't like the selections, then start your own site and pic your own images. You can't please 'em all..... Lastly, evaluation of art is subjective, so nobody's opinion is "wrong". To endlessly debate each other's opinions for little reason other than to call attention to ourselves is childish, and a monumental waste of time, IMHO.

I agree that comments such as "wow" and "great" do not provide the kind of constructive criticism that is useful. However, if that is how viewers feel about an image, at least they are able to register their delight. They are surely entitled to their opinion too. Among the brickbats, the photographer can at least take solace in a few modest bouquets.

You strike me as a fair man at core, Simon, so I would ask that you let me try again.

Occasionally I get emails from members of this community. These missives run from one extreme to the other. Going on two weeks ago I was the recipient of an "anonymous" message which fairly railed that I was a "Moron!" Within a day I read two other letters, these from people who, if they do not exactly find joy in my method, understand as I do that all is not well at base on this server with regard to these discussions under the various POW's. And so on.

Last night I received yet another email related to this business. The person who wrote this one asked me to please tone it down as he found the interplay on this week's POW to be something of a distraction. My response indicated agreement in principle but a sure reluctance on my part to be this forum's pincushion.

Well, we exchanged one more email, with no effective change in our positions--the other gentleman opined that for me to pursue the current vein of exchanges would only reduce me to part of the problem, whereas I thought that to ignore much of what goes on here could only encourage such behavior down the road.

There I left it, supposing this might be the end. Since that time I have enjoyed a good night's rest, and with further thought I have this to say.

If this forum is to achieve an atmosphere conducive to photographic education then that happy transformation will be the result of positive action by our collective itself, that is to say a working majority of our membership coming together willlfuly and consciously. Such change will not be affected by new controls implanted by the server's administration, it will not come about magically one evening if we close our eyes and whisper in concord some mantra to the gods . . . it will not just happen.

I'm not holding my breath, but then I guess anything's possible, one never knows and like that.

To date it ought to be obvious that the grading system (any grading system) only encourages an atmosphere which sits diametrically opposed to any ideal like education, and judging from the lukewarm involvement of members I'd say it is not looked on favorably by the whole. But that's addition by subtraction. What about involvement in other areas? What about comments?

Most people don't bother. This is an old problem online, with the majority not bothering to add anything of their own but rather content to lurk, to get their chuckles or feel their blood boil in silence. For those who do particpate, the lines are as a rule quickly and surely drawn. On this server those lines, speaking broadly, approximate: the "feel-gooders," a crowd happy to use the site as a place to congregate for the virtual friendships they have all come to crave over time--these people feel most comfortable in and generally work and react most effectively as a group per se--left to their individual devices they are normally ineffectual; the "disturbers," people who do not normally work in teams but rather do function well as individuals, usually out of desire to inject something more pertinent into the community than good vibes just for the sake of them--often accused of being of similar minds, nothing could be further amiss as these people love to go their own ways and only end up at the same spot occasionally and as it happens; last, we have the "neutrals," people who often as not represent a sort of sub-majority of the minority we actually speak to here, a nebulous grouping of people which is really only a "group" insofar as it is easier to gather these people under one more-or-less descriptive umbrella for the purpose of accounting--silent mainly, ambiguous by nature, wishy-washy by choice, these poor souls prefer to just sail by, and lose the waves, please.

That's an important point, by the way--that the "majority" listed above is actually only a majority of a lesser minority. Please try to remember that the next time someone blithely strolls onto the forum to announce what "the majority" thinks. That is ignorance, that is sophistry. The true majority is silent, the actual majority doesn't bother in the first place, the only real majority apparently doesn't care.

That is the crux of the problem, and no solution will be found that fails to include somehow and take into consderation these silent wonders. Without the weight of their voice we're left with what we have, a fitful collection of various minorities of special interests that can do no better than to squabble amongst and within.

You want "good" change? You desire that the server's administration listens to your plea? Then come up with some round numbers, go wake that majority, shake some interest out of these quiet people. For as always it is they who represent the balance, and as usual they simply don't care.

Find a way to cause them to care and there is hope.

I just want to say I like this picture, primarily because of the lighting conditions, the subject material, and the overall look of the image.

I quite like this picture, it reminds me of a Parisian Lounge, and if it wasn't for the modern looking microphone it could be almost be mistaken for an old Photo.

 

Sometimes juggling several elememts within the composition can only ever lead to a small amount of success, all the timing in the world isn't going to create magic if your subjects dont 'create a moment' worth Photographing.

 

In this instance the composition works but the energy of the picture is being shared between the singer and the guitar player. I'm not talking about composition so much, just interest for the eye. If the opportunity exists to move closer and lower, perhaps switching to 50mm, then we could get more depth...however, I'm sure the place was restrictive so you have to work with what you've got.

 

My guess is that this is probably the best compromise most of us could achieve under those restrictions and with the same equipment and method.

 

Always carry some fast TMAX in your bag (I think they make a 3200 asa now), it beats pushing Neopan and would certainly render the scene more dramatically.

 

I disagree about the shadow detail critique.

Many good Photographers record in the shadows, others to greater effect do not. Certainly in low light, going for highlights (with your composition of form and content) will save you upto four stops that you may waste on a dull dark dress.

 

And Tris your 'Essays' are making this place less like a Community and more like a Fish Shop.

 

I'm sure if you saved your Rhetoric for the fishmonger, I for one would offer more constructive advice.

 

This is great. Everyone has been writing more, more members have been contributing their comments and opinions to POW, and there has been such a great mix of both negative and positive feedback. Although many people don't agree with some of the comments here, like the one's made by Tris,(sorry to mention names), it is those comments that keep things so interesting and spark all the great discussion and arguments. It is better that those people (like Tris) keep on talking and contradicitng other's views and perspectives. Without it, this place would be dull and boring, and we'd all be sitting on a couch watching power rangers and drinking apple juice. I don;'t know if Tris purposely comments on all the photo's differently than most other people do, but either way it's great!

I'd prefer a good wine or port and truffles on the couch among other things... (stuff deleted in move to clean up POW attack-counter attack) Someone stop me! (Tom did)

You know, Mary, I was just talking about "idiots" and "idiocy" to someone in email, and sure enough, right away you show up with your typical brand of genius.

Have you bothered to count the number of different photographers on this site? I haven't but they outnumber those who bother to participate on the POW comments by a worrying extent.That is how I know (and you ought to know) that the majority of this server's users don't care.

Moving right along . . .

. . . Chris states that if it were not for my efforts here he'd probably contribute more. I find that difficult to believe since he came before I came yet his contributions to the POW comments have never amounted to much. To give credit where credit is due, Chris did bother to maintain some presence when one of his images was selected POW two weeks ago, as did Ian last week, something sorely lacking as a rule, but that's been about it.

Indeed, it was Chris who delivered himself to a hard position of opinion re the proper use of IR film some time past for another POW, and when another member asked him to explain his position Chris didn't bother.

Thanks, Chris, but I'd just as soon you didn't lay your shortcomings on my doorstep.

As for the use of TMax here as opposed to pushing Neopan: I agree in principle and from what I can see I don't think Neopan's much of an emulsion anyway, at least not for this lighting situation. As a rule I'd always advise using a faster film than the push process, though I should also mention that the one roll of TMax 3200 that I've used didn't give me very good images back. That's not a good sample, admittedly, and for all I know the lab over in Spain blew it, so I'll continue to give that emulsion a tryout until I know for sure. It does get decent reviews from other photographers, so it can't be all bad.

Oh...my...god... Hey Christian, Darron and Jeff et al... Thanks.. But what the heck is happening here! Jeez... is everyone drinking too much fermented apple juice here! I'm laughing so hard I have tears in my eyes. I suppose I should take it seriously because in a way it is kind of sad. What the heck are we here for. Let us get back to photography! I'm guilty! My fault too. I promise promise promise I will not rise to the bait! (I'll try)

The photograph is good. I see lots of gray (which is just a mixture of black and white). the depth of field is good too. The dress is very dark, not much detail, but it works.

 

*Christian Reynolds

 

I wasn't talking about top member rated list.

 

Elves (in response to an earlier suggestion): Yes, an "ignore this user" option would be great! Or a seperate bin for trollers and usenet type posts (like this one?)

Will all you people please stop. And I do mean all of you. I really had high hopes for this pow... it started out well. For all the bashing he is receiving, even Tris' comment wasn't bad. Then Dennis starts with "Nobody is forcing you to comment on these photos Tris." And then suddenly Tris is defending himself instead of talking about the photo as he started off. In fact Dennis didn't even comment on the photo of the week until his 5th post. Now I don't know either of these two people at all. I emailed them both offline because I'm tired of this crap and at least Tris was nice enough to respond. Why can't Tris say he doesn't like something? So he's hard to please big deal. He wasn't even insulting in his post before he was attacked. We don't even have the amount of "wow beautiful colors" types of comments that are usually on POW. Hmmm maybe a reason for picking black and whites. Nice to see Vuk make his comment and not get involved in this childish behaviour.

 

It's easy to get wrapped up into fighting each other on here and it seems that somepeople, whether they know it or not, come here for that reason. It seems you people don't have a tolerance for negativity but a giant appetite for hate and insults.

 

Geez... Nobody jumped on Darron Sphon for his negative critique of the photo. Have a look at his comments on his photo that was selected as POW and you'll be pretty much surprised that he didn't seem to give this a fair shot.

 

Other people that were on the verge of commiting crimes through this site haven't been deleted yet Darron want's to remove Tris? I'm talking here as an unbiased observer. Except for one person I don't really communicate with many of the people on this thread. But Tris didn't start it at least not this time or the times I can remember. If yo are going to remove Tris you should Remove Dennis too as he seemed to start it this time.

 

Have a look at the posts of people that have posted more than 2 or 3 times on here and on other POW's. How much of it is intelligent discussion? I argue that it either starts out as ....

 

you know what screw it. This isn't worth the effort. I decided not to look and respond to pow's a while a go but I got drawn into this one for various reasons and I regret responding at all. I'm still very happy this is pow but I'm dissapointed at the behaviour it brings out in members of this site. Even people that I usually like to find elsewhere on the site I can't stand to see some of their follow up comments here. I'd like to make an appeal to these people to stop. I'm including myself in the list. Can we all go through are posts and see if they have anything to do with the photo on the top of the page and if it doesn't delete it. Or at least promise not to do this again next week? It's only the end of day 2 and there are over 100 posts.

 

Everyone's argument for littering POW with their nonesense and bickering is because they want to see it change for the better. Well it's either changed or changing but the peanut gallery of regular posters haven't improved one bit.

 

On a side note. If you say you are going to leave the site in protest leave the site with dignity then don't come back under a different name. That just makes you stranger and cowardly.

Lovely pic... I like how the men in the background are hidden in the smoke.. The model look very emotionaly involved with her singing.. I can almost smell the cigar smoke that fill up the stage!!

If the people in here were as "professional" and "knowlegeable" as they present themselves to be, when an off-handed/rude/ignorant/idiotic etc, etc remark was said...it, would be ignored.

Some regulars here obviously have more time on their hands then they should and therefore revel in the idea of online mud-slinging. An argument cannot be one-sided. Post your honest thoughts on a subject and ignore the hostilities.

The people who come on here know whom the trouble makers are and because of their attitudes, their credibility has been shot.

I have been a visitor to this site because I believe that a wealth of information can be found here.This forum, which could be something great, has become a ring for bouts of egos...not for honest, intelligent dialog on this art form in which we have all fell in love with!

 

SILENCE IS GOLDEN

 

 

Tom had some points I respect and as indicated in my comments, I have immaturely risen to the bait. I edited my comments as a result. (Making sure to indicate where I had altered them to eliminate confusion in the thread)

Herr - eh, you know who you are. Given your fax ("Your comments on the recent POW threads have contributed very little toward learning about photography. I've ignored them until now, but these personal attacks on other photo.net members will cease if you wish to remain a member. ") and all the non-photo related comments you generate, why not take a step back and CONSIDER that maybe the moderator is right? Maybe most people in here are right (about you). Sure, we COULD be wrong, but what are the odds?

 

As for this entire POW thread, how depressing. This is as bad as the "Best Editor" flame wars on usenet. Keep it simple, keep it on photography, or post a link to a usenet group and take up their disk space.

 

As for B&W vs. Color, why is ANYONE counting? They ("elves") pick what they pick for the reasons they state. Agree/disagree. Fine. Even if you don't like B&W, maybe you will LEARN to like or at least appreciate it in another way. Maybe you aren't thrilled with a picture (of any "different" type) now, but will LEARN to see some good things in it none the less? It's free! Stop whining.

 

 

This pic reminds me of a back cover photo from an old 12 inch vinyl album. As such it is quite nostalgic. Not a real lot of detail, but an illustrative picture of the group on the front cover (of my imaginary album).

 

The composition is fairly regular (nothing too adventurous) and the stark B&W nature is reminiscent of a nightclub atmosphere: smoke, bourbon and good music. So I'd have to say it was a success, in its own terms (although the composition is a bit too much to the right for mine - once your eye latches onto these things you can't shake them off).

 

The rest of the portfolio shows a dedication to music performance documentation that is impressive in its consistency (the African group reminds me of the old Osibisa, "Criss-cross rhythms that explode with happiness"). This is harder to capture than it appears. The photographer has made it look disarmingly easy and straightforward. Good choice for PoW.

First I have to say WOW! Is there really a chance of shutting Herr Schuler up?!? The only reason I avoid this place recently is because I dont want to spend a large portion of my life sifting through Mr Schulers psychotic, 120-car trains of thought looking for morsels of intelligence.

 

I am an optimist and I wish that people like Mr Schuler would learn to focus their pessimism on something more constructive, possible in another forum, cause I used to like this one.

 

As to the POW, Im sorry Alen but I dont like it much and I will explain why.

 

As posted somewhere above, the contrast of the singer is WAY to harsh on my eyes and I find it easier to examine the musicians. The singer is so harsh and textureless that she seems flat like a silhouette.

 

All this got me to thinking and looking a little closer. I used to cover stage events and do my own dark room work with B&W so this is familiar territory to me. I cant figure out why the singers dress has ABSOLUTELY NO texture but the guitarists suit jacket has plenty. At first one would assume that it is due to poor lighting but according to the singers face there is a harsh spot light on her, as there should be. So then why is there no detail in the dress, at least around the neck?

 

Another thing I noticed was the lack of blown out edges. The wedding photo a couple weeks ago was a perfect example of how overexposure to light on one part of the film will start to burn its surroundings just like a street lamp on a long night shot. So why does the back of the singers hair and neck have such a pure black and white line?

 

I wanted to figure out what is going on with this image so I blew the large version up to 1600% in PS.

 

I dont want to falsely accuse you of anything Alen but it looks to me like there has been some editing here. I am not even implying that editing is a bad thing, I just dont understand why the singers dress has NO texture. If it were my picture I would dodge some of her face and burn the dress a bit more. It looks to me like you did the exact opposite.

 

I do however like the smoke and light effects like most other people.

Herr - eh, you know who you are. Given your fax ("Your comments on the recent POW threads have contributed very little toward learning about photography. I've ignored them until now, but these personal attacks on other photo.net members will cease if you wish to remain a member. ") and all the non-photo related comments you generate, why not take a step back and CONSIDER that maybe the moderator is right? Maybe most people in here are right (about you). Sure, we COULD be wrong, but what are the odds?

Odds? There are no odds. It is a certainty.One of the surest finds in life is an established group which will kick and scream at the least suggestion of criticism of its behavior. It's a well-known group dynamic.

Why must you play into this norm? Why address me out of name, why address me as "Herr" or "Professor" or anything other than "Tris"? It is rude, it is gauche, it is uneducated. It is also not at all unexpected. (Do you know where that's going or should I continue?)

I'm sorry, but the sad fact is this group, or at least the puny minority of this server which goes to constitute this group (those who participate in the POW comments) mainly behaves as if this were the playground at Franklin School in Wausau, Wisconsin. And if you care to know, that was my grade school when I wore a younger man's clothes.

There has been a bit of good humor on this thread, though even there I'm afraid there's irony as I doubt many have caught it.

Listen to what people say, read what they actually write, and then if you feel compelled to respond stay on topic.

If not, reap what you sow. It's that simple.